secretary of state clinton, that if there was movement of any chemical weapons of mass destruction, movement -- now, as i listen to what you're saying, there hasn't been movement. it looks like they're getting ready where they are, but they haven't moved yet, so maybe they haven't violated the red line exactly. >> that's right, larry. they've got everything in place to do that. but what are the possibilities here? u.s. military officials say it would be very difficult to target certain areas. there are possibilities if they're going to load them on the planes. they could use cruise missiles to attack airstrips, for example. they can't blow up the weapons sites themselves, otherwise then the deadly gases could be spread among the public and kill thousands. the only other option according to some people that i've been talking to over the past couple of days is possibly take those cruise missiles and aim them not only at the airport strips, but at regime targets. even perhaps president assad himself. but so far, we haven't gotten there, the big question is can the u.s. react quickly e

of state hillary clinton, chris christie and honey boo boo have in common? they've all been placed on barbara walters' most fascinating list. honey boo boo has her fair share of critics including adam lee convenient and south parks. she's sweet loving. look at that face. >> so that's not a sign? >> what? >> of the myan prophecy. >> i knew you were going there. >> that's scary. >> all right. next on fast city stores, is it safe to get into this stock? our traders will make the call. special dividends are all the rage. is there one etf? we've got an under the radar name. that is next on "fast." [ male announcer ] with wells fargo advisors envision planning process, it's easy to follow the progress you're making toward all your financial goals. a quick glance, and you can see if you're on track. when the conversation turns to knowing where you stand, turn to us. wells fargo advisors. to provide a better benefits package... oahhh! [ male announcer ] it made a big splash with the employees. [ duck yelling ] [ male announcer ] find out more at... [ duck ] aflac! [ male announcer ] ...for

speaker. >> four days ago we offered a serious proposal based on testimony of president clinton's former chief of staff. since then there's been no counteroffer from the white house. instead, reports indicate that the president has adopted a deliberate strategy to slow-walk our economy right to the edge of the fiscal cliff. >> reporter: not surprisingly, democratic house leader nancy pelosi had precisely the opposite explanation for what is behind this stalemate. she says republicans simply echoing the white house are going to have to buckle on the issue of the top rates. >> the only obstacle standing in the way of middle income tax relief are the republicans unwillingness to ask the top 2% to pay their fair share. >> but tyler, as you suggested, this is all a work in progress. the thing we cannot see that is not visible to the public or to the press is what's going on behind the scenes. staff discussions resumed yesterday. don't know how fruitful. i haven't gotten much of a signal from people on either side that a deal is close, but they're work rg at it and sometimes these situa

-- >> howard goes on and on. clinton tax rates on everybody. will it cause a problem? yeah, short recession, but we get defense cuts which republicans would never agree to otherwise, there are human service cut which is we won't like, but the least possible damage. and it's a serious down payment on the deficit. the wall street people ringing their hands are really full of it. i'm not sure what. but full of something because they're going to see a big drop on wall street but it will come roaring back because somebody has done something. so you have him and all their friends and the right and all their friends and the president who i don't think if he can ever get out of campaign mode. it's a full on campaign again. putting one party into -- >> you're right, the amt will hit more people in the middle class and raise their effective tax rate to a higher rate than they were today. and you won't -- >> you have obamacare 4% on everyone, too. >> if you lieu numerically, it doesn't make sense if one side says we're not going to race taxes on the middle class -- >> although republicans would probab

. there is no reason why going back to the clinton era rates is, we're going to do -- >> you might not get the benefit if you don't do anything to the deficit you're talking ten times the revenue if you go below the 98%. you can't return to clinton prosperity only raising taxes on 2%. it's different for all taxpayers. am i right? >> you're almost entirely wrong. >> why would raising just on the 2% get us back to the clinton prosperity you're talking about? we can't return to the spending levels either. >> getting to a sound fiscal position is necessary to protect the economy. if we don't do that, as this economy recovers, that recovery is going to be aborted and that's going to do damage. then the question is how you get there, and the president believes that we should raise revenues with a tax system that has been proven in the past to go along with very substantial -- >> you can't conflate the two. you have the entire -- >> joe, joe, if you go back to this, i'm not sure what you're arguing. >> raising on 2% is different than the other structure. >> the reason it's different is th

back to the clinton time? the real core of what clinton had was they cut spending. their percentage of spending to gdp was so much less, and that's where they got out of it. that agreement in '97 cut taxes and cut spending, which spurred growth. and we need a pro-growth economy. that's how we're going to get out of this mess. what we're talking about today, of just raising the taxes, does not solve the problem. i don't see it passing the house. now, republicans have not sat back. we've put revenue on the table. but the president has always said it has to be a balanced approach. >> if you can choose, if you could choose, what's -- i mean we've heard -- we've heard from their side, from the other side, and i'm talking about from your viewpoint, secretary geithner. >> yes. >> has said, we -- if we don't get the 2% -- if we don't get the rise on rates on the 2% we'll go over the fiscal cliff. in your view would it be better to go over the fiscal cliff than to get the back to the clinton rates on the high end? >> i think the best thing we don't go over the fiscal cliff. >> you do? you'd rat

clinton era rates. you get rid of three quarters of the deficit just on tax increases at that point. >> and he says you get defense cuts. >> you can't get defense cuts any other way. and he's not the only one. there's a lot of people on the left and there's quite a few people on the right. i'm glad you're optimistic and a lot of ceos and guys in your position -- if you run a company, you don't need consumers petrified and business people petrified. this is the last thing we need if you run a company. i understand you have a horse in the game. >> but you also have the double trigger. if you go over the cliff, we've got the debt ceiling fight right afterwards. it's not like that's six months down the line. that's in if first month, six weeks of the new year. >> the other thing, depending on where you stand, the idea that we just get rid of congressional approval of the debt ceiling at all, which is that ludicrous proposal that was in the president's plan. that's not -- and would you really want that? would you really want not having any more oversight over whether we keep raising the

president clinton's former chief of staff. since then there's been no counteroffer from the white house. instead reports indicate that the president has adopted a deliberate strategy to slow-walk our economy right to the edge of the fiscal cliff. instead of reforming the tax code and cutting spending, the president wants to raise tax rates. but even if the president got the tax rate hike that he wanted, understand that we would continue to see trillion-dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see. listen. washington's got a spending problem, not a revenue problem. if the president doesn't agree with our proposal, i believe that he's got an obligation to families and small businesses to offer a plan of his own, a plan that can pass both chambers of the congress. we're ready and eager to talk to the pretty about such a plan. >> speaker, you did speak with the pretsident earlier this wee. can you talk about that call? also we understand that he's making clear that it's got to be increasing rates for the wealthy or no deal. are you willing to give a little bit, maybe not all the way to 39.

give you a nontruth. we always talk about the 1993 income tax of president clinton, and the top tax rate was 39.6%. threshold, $250 thud. so flash forward from 1993 to present, okay. well let me tell you something, there is this little thing called inflation. i know this might be nitpicking. but $250,000 today well, started out if you want to be apples to apples would be about $165,000 then. in other words, we are not adjusting even for inflation. so, if we're talking about $250,000 today being the same as then, we're wrong. it would be $165,000. so the point is, is that the difference between these two is $85,000. okay? is a 35% miss when it comes to being honest about it. oh, even worse let's take this. how many times, of course you've heard a million times, taxes on million favors and billionaires, even though, and i know this is adjusted, okay, but let's just keep it $250,000. well, 250 grand isn't a million. so it's off by 750-k over 1 million. okay? so, in essence, what we're doing is we're off on this one by 75%. we're off by 35% and 75%. so why am i doing this? because i'll

president bill clinton -- >> he's in philadelphia with the middle class behind him and nodding and saying, i've got a pen, i've got a pen. i've still got a pen, i've still got a pen. >> president obama owes president clinton a great deal for helping him get elected. number one, we need a meaningful citizen education engagement effort with the white house in formada, next year to build the case for a grand bargain. the official version of what i did and what my colleagues did over the last several months and we need congressional hearings that will set the stage for tax reforms, social security reform and the president needs to negotiate privately and have discussions with congressional leaders of both parties privately. those three things can get us to the promt promise land. and without all three of those, we're in trouble. >> but, david, that is exactly what was supposed to happen between july of 2011 and today. and guess what? none of it has happened. none of it. we're having the same conversation. >> you know what? >> only the president can lead. only the president can lead. >> he has

was around when clinton -- remember that economy? okay. he said i wish president obama and the democrats would explain to the nation the federal budget deficit isn't the major problem and deficit reduction shouldn't be the major goal. problem is lack of good jobs and the goal must to be revive both. deficit reduction leads us away from jobs and growth. the reason the fiscal cliff is dangerous is because it's too much deficit reduction too quickly that would suck demand out of the economy. more jobs and growth will help the deficit. recall the '90s when the clinton administration balanced the budget because of faster job growth than anybody expected bringing in more tax revenues than anyone had forecast. europe offers the same lesson in reverse. thank you. as jim says, every time we talk about this, they keep taking the wrong -- lindsey graham said we're going to be greece. yeah, if we do what you want! the best way to generate jobs and growth is for the government to spend more, not less. and for taxes to stay lor owe become lower on the middle class. so you know, just -- >> ro